If I-banking is “socially dubious”, so is the medical profession
To the Daily:
I think everyone at this university owes James Yu (“No pity for B-school students: I-Banking “socially dubious,”” 1/23/02) our gratitude for not choosing a “socially dubious” path such as I-Banking. Obviously Yu”s enrollment in the medical school is based solely on his philanthropic nature, and has nothing to do with the sizeable income of many doctors.
Please. The only thing more offensive than Yu”s labeling of I-Banking (or any profession) as “socially dubious” is the hypocrisy Yu demonstrates when he suggests that I-Bankers ask for forgiveness for profiting off of customers”s gains.
Yu is, in essence, making a living off of others” physical misfortunes. Doctors, after all, are well compensated for their services. If they were not, who would want to be a doctor? I wonder how willing Yu would be to practice medicine in Canada, where he could still help others but make substantially less money.
I don”t know of anyone who holds a full-time job simply for fun. Most people work out of necessity, and thus try to make the most money possible in the shortest period of time.
Perhaps Yu is made of a character most of us are not. I have a sneaking suspicion though that this is simply a case of an “idealist” thumbing his nose at another for something he himself would do.
Ironic how easy it is to criticize the faults in others what we overlook in ourselves, isn”t it?
Students, educators need to push for elimination of DMCA
To the Daily:
The Digital Millennium Copyright Act has had a chilling effect on technology, education and creativity far more dire than increased fees for webcasts. (“Fees will kill the radio star,” 1/28/02.) One of the most harmful clauses in the DMCA outlaws circumvention of copyright protection, which is any method, device, knowledge or technology that could potentially allow a person to get around copy or playback protection systems. The result of this has sent people to jail for creating e-book readers for the blind, stopped professors from publishing research and stopped the development of new and innovative technologies.
The result of the DMCA is enormously expensive legal battles with industry giants like the Recording Industry Association of America and the Motion Picture Assocation of America and infringement on the fair use and first-sale rights of the consumers. One example of this infringement worthy of serious concern is copy protected CDs. These CDs are purposely created with corrupt sections of data. Most audio CD players will skip over this, but it does prevent most computers from reading the CD for playback, copying, or conversion to MP3. Of course, this leads to two immediate problems. First, the CD is no longer a true CD as it is corrupt, like buying a scratched CD. Second, the sound quality is decreased by the errors. This is where the power of the DMCA becomes truly overreaching. The DMCA says that if we try to correct these errors or skip over them, we are breaking the law because the errors are a form of copy protection.
Copyright law was created for two reasons: To allow the artists to pursue a living with the protection of law and to advance the knowledge and culture of our civilization. But today, when the industry giants instead of the artists hold the copyrights, both the rights of artists and of the public are being ignored. As a diverse and progressive body of students and educators interested in the sciences and the arts, we need to push for the elimination of the DMCA.